Related photos / videos

Spiritual healer Davender Ghai, 71, was granted his last wish by the Court of
Appeal which ruled the controversial ceremony could be carried out
without a change in the law.

But the judges ruled in his favour only after Ghai agreed that the pyre would be surrounded by walls and a
roof with an opening, the Press Association domestic news agency
reported.

Ghai believes that a pyre is essential to "a good death" and for the release of his spirit into the afterlife.

He wants a permit for an open-air cremation site in a remote part of Northumberland in northern England.

Ghai was originally refused permission by the local authority in Newcastle
and lost a legal challenge to that decision at the High Court last May.

British law prohibits the burning of human remains anywhere outside a
crematorium and Newcastle council had further blocked his wish on the
grounds that it was impractical.

Jonathan Swift, representing the Ministry of Justice which opposed Ghai, said the law stipulated that
cremations must be within a building which in this case meant a
structure bounded by walls with a roof.

He said what Ghai was proposing did not comply with the law which was there to protect "decorum and decency."

But the appeal judges disagreed, saying the Cremation Act was in place to
ensure burnings were subject to uniform rules throughout the country
and executed in buildings which were appropriately equipped and away
from homes or roads.

The judges accepted Ghai was willing to be cremated within existing rules with his funeral pyre "enclosed in a
structure." They ruled the government's definition of a building was
too narrow.

The decision could now set a precedent for the 560,000 Hindus living in Britain. Hindu national organisations,
representing some 90 percent of Hindus in the UK, had backed the Ghai's
original High Court appeal.

Ghai said in a statement he was "overjoyed" by the ruling.

He added: "This case was truly a matter of life and death for me and
today's verdict has breathed new life into an old man's dreams."

I read this with astonishment. What about dangers of the smoke generated. Are they frightened in the UK of upsetting minority groups. Why cant they go to their countries and do this.
It seems in Britain, as demonstrated by the case of the muslim man who attacked a man given a jail sentance then he was defended by Cherie Blair as he was a religious man and did not mean to do such a terrible thing, you must not upset anyone.
Are these judges controlled by minority groups, I wonder.
I get in to trouble when I burn rubbish, so do you think I ought to go to Court to overthrow this.
Of course not, I am not religious and have not got Mrs Blair to defend me. Actually I want to buried in my garden under my favourite tree, so I should take up some religion to make this possible eh.

Misty I do agree with you, I just think that this should not be decided on religious grounds, and I think it would make a good barbeque for friends and neighbours to attend, wearing atheist teeshirts, and singing my favourite song You;ll never walk alone.
My point is that I would not get a law passed to do this in my back garden on the grounds I was an Atheist.

well christians and everybody does what they want to do .....why not let hindus do it too....i see damn cemeteries taking up such good useful land that nobody says anything about....and give surviving family members suffering year after year....with stupid customs of going to grave and leaving flowers and shit...thats absurd that's what u should change first....because we have limited land space available to us...if it was me we would just do what people call green funeral now a days dig a ditch and put me in and the money spent on funeral would go to buying the land for conservation....

Meh. Fair enough. There is a difference between allowing something because it is a non-issue and allowing something because believing in your imaginary friend makes you special.
I'm hugely irritated by religion being above the law.
I'm also hugely irritated by the law being overly stifling.

that's the problem with a cemetery takes space, less doesn't make it better.....now there are stupid pet cemeteries.....where are we going to stop? just tell me that people wont be upset when we have to plough these places for fertile land that they are to grow some damn food....humans need to accept facts as they are and they don't change....different coping mechanisms should be made available for grief, not less space cemeteries or mausoleums....humans are no better than any other life form on earth